In P Newey (t/a Ocean Finance) v HMRC (TC00487 – 18 May), a financial adviser (N), who was registered for VAT, was the controlling shareholder of a Jersey company (AC), which provided loan broking services in the UK.
VAT: The principle of 'abuse'
In P Newey (t/a Ocean Finance) v HMRC (TC00487 – 18 May) a financial adviser (N) who was registered for VAT was the controlling shareholder of a Jersey company (AC) which provided loan broking services in the UK.
HMRC issued an assessment on N charging VAT of more than £10 000 000 on the basis that he should be treated as supplying the loan broking services and was liable to a 'reverse charge' under VATA 1994 s 8(1) in respect of advertising services supplied by another Jersey company (W).
N appealed. The Tribunal allowed his appeal ...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
In P Newey (t/a Ocean Finance) v HMRC (TC00487 – 18 May), a financial adviser (N), who was registered for VAT, was the controlling shareholder of a Jersey company (AC), which provided loan broking services in the UK.
VAT: The principle of 'abuse'
In P Newey (t/a Ocean Finance) v HMRC (TC00487 – 18 May) a financial adviser (N) who was registered for VAT was the controlling shareholder of a Jersey company (AC) which provided loan broking services in the UK.
HMRC issued an assessment on N charging VAT of more than £10 000 000 on the basis that he should be treated as supplying the loan broking services and was liable to a 'reverse charge' under VATA 1994 s 8(1) in respect of advertising services supplied by another Jersey company (W).
N appealed. The Tribunal allowed his appeal ...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
